Since this masthead’s revelations last week regarding organised crime links to the state government’s Big Build, there have been calls for deregistration of the CFMEU, the resurrection of the Australian Building and Construction Commission and for anti-racketeering laws similar to those introduced in the United States in the 1970s.
As our reporter Nick McKenzie pointed out, “rackets typically need three parties: a mobster, a dodgy unionist and a corrupt building company. In other words, this isn’t only a union problem.”
The CFMEU has more than 120,000 members nationwide, roughly a quarter of them in its construction division. If we want major building projects in Victoria and across Australia delivered in a timely and cost-effective way, and workers to clock in and out free from the threat of violence, then our focus must be on cleaning the union up as quickly as possible.
One of the strongest arguments for a royal commission into the persistent corruption surrounding construction sites is that it could compel witnesses to appear. To have a lasting effect, the testimony cannot only be from those intimidated and even bashed on the job by bikies masquerading as health and safety officers. It has to come from leading figures in the state government, the public service and our police force, as well as top union officials and company bosses.
One of the most urgent questions such an inquiry would tackle is that of how accountability operates within this government. In the years since the Big Build began, a thicket of statutory authorities have formed, re-formed and merged, from the Suburban Rail Loop Authority and the Level Crossing Removal Authority to (in 2019) the Major Transport Infrastructure Authority and (since April 2024) the Victoria Infrastructure Delivery Authority.
Critics have long argued that this series of administrative changes had the effect of reducing transparency and creating an inaccessible bureaucracy that hindered proper consultation. But Victorians need to know if it also created an environment in which corruption could flourish out of sight of officials.
How does ministerial responsibility on the Westminster model operate in this landscape? Does all this shuffling of roles and delivery agencies give ministers plausible deniability when it comes to failures of administration and the creation of unsafe workplaces?
The climate of fear on building sites has meant that police have often lacked sufficient evidence from witnesses to proceed against those they believe to be carrying out extortion. But neither the police nor the CFMEU’s administrator, Mark Irving, KC, are going to make the kind of inroads required without greater resourcing. Organised crime is a network that stretches across jurisdictions and industries – it cannot be successfully confronted by a small team of investigators, however well-intentioned.
Earlier this week, we said that “those who oversaw the growth of this cancer in our state, at a minimum, owe Victorians an explanation, genuine solutions and an apology”, and that if they couldn’t supply these three things, then they should step aside.
Since then, we have had press conferences which offer an all-too-familiar diet of deflection and denial. If Operation Hawk is going to be the answer Premier Jacinta Allan gives to this problem, it needs to take wing.
Our reporting shows that so far there are major questions over whether Operation Hawk is fit for purpose, with one complaint last year being referred by Victoria Police to the Fair Work Commission and then back to police. Is this the kind of “immediate” response the premier has in mind?
After months of examining an alleged catering rort linked to bikie standover man and former union delegate Joel Leavitt, police told witnesses they were abandoning the investigation. “We don’t have the resources or ability to run it through court,” said one law enforcement source, granted anonymity to discuss confidential information.
If Allan needs federal government support or new legislation to beef up the response to this huge problem, she should say so. If she doesn’t, then she should explain how she intends to get to the bottom of a cesspit that has already festered for far too long.
The Big Build has been on the premier’s CV for some years. Along with any credit for its implementation comes responsibility when things go wrong. Or is that not how major projects or government in this state work any more?
From now until the next election, The Age’s reporters will be asking these questions and others like them because they have a bearing on the lives of all Victorians. If Allan and her ministers cannot provide real answers, they do not deserve to continue in office.
Get a weekly wrap of views that will challenge, champion and inform your own. Sign up for our Opinion newsletter.